7 ms·

You are implying this is a major story… it isn’t. If Assange were actually standing trial, that’s interesting. Hearing more random court proceedings of a very

You are implying this is a major story… it isn’t. If Assange were actually standing trial, that’s interesting. Hearing more random court proceedings of a very bizarre 10 year fiasco is not. Everybody is a critic of what the MSM is covering. They cover what is interesting. It isn’t a giant conspiracy to explain their behavior.

cudgy 5y ago
Interesting is relative. In fact, many might find main stream media to be the opposite of interesting.
- peter422 5y ago
  MSM is by definition targeting the mainstream audience. Watch mainstream primetime television… It’s the same audience.
boomboomsubban 5y ago
>If Assange were actually standing trial, that’s interesting His extradition hearing to see if this charge can be tried is currently facing an appeal, and he is still in prison partially for this charge.
- peter422 5y ago
  Not in an American court, for a non-American citizen, for something that happened 10 years ago. It just isn’t as interesting as you think it is. And it is getting coverage! It just isn’t front page news.
  - boomboomsubban 5y ago
    Yes in an American court, they are the ones charging him with these crimes. And it isn't getting any major oublisher coverage, searching "Julian Assange" on both DDG and Google news shows only Democracy Now covering the story.
    - dragonwriter 5y ago
      > Yes in an American court, they are the ones charging him with these crimes. Yes, the USA is charging him. It would be very odd for extradition hearings on US federal charges to be heard in a US court, and, in fact, these are not. Assange is not on trial, and the process he is currently undergoing in is not in an American court, though there are charges pending that he would face in a US court if that process completes as the US prefers. I can see you arguing that that's not important, but falsely denying the assertion that its not in a US court is...I mean, what's even the point?
      - boomboomsubban 5y ago
        Assange is set to face trial in a US court, and that is the only reason he is facing extradition. > I can see you arguing that that's not important, but falsely denying the assertion that its not in a US court is...I mean, what's even the point? I am arguing that it is important and view the extradition hearing as part of his larger US trial. His trial for skipping bail in the UK is long over, the only trial left is the US one.
        dragonwriter 5y ago
        > I am arguing that it is important and view the extradition hearing as part of his larger US trial. The extradition hearing is factually not part of his US trial. > the only trial left is the US one. The US charges are the only ones that he is currently known to be facing a potential future trial for, sure. But “potential future” and “actual current” are not the same thing.
        boomboomsubban 5y ago
        The first step of the trial was for charges to be filed. The next part was using those charges to request his extradition. At this point you could say the extradition hearing is not a part of his trial, but it is only happening because of the trial and the US is the reason he is in prison currently. I'd write this off as weird pedantry but you're accusing me of lying for some reason.
mpfundstein 5y ago
man you are nuts. cant say it differently
- dang 5y ago
  Please don't break the site guidelines like this. It poisons the ecosystem here, and it discredits your view. The latter is especially pernicious if your view happens to be the right one, because then you're also discrediting the truth, which harms everybody (https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&sort=byDate&type=comment&query=truth%20discredit%20by:dang https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&sor...). If you wouldn't mind reviewing https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and taking the intended spirit of the site more to heart, we'd be grateful. Edit: yikes, you've been breaking the site guidelines a ton lately. When accounts are primarily using HN for ideological or political battle, we ban them; also when they're mostly posting unsubstantive and/or flamebait comments; and you've been doing both of these things. That's not cool. We've also had to warn you several times about this in the past. I don't want to ban you because you've posted good and relevant comments in the past, but if you don't stop this pattern, we're definitely going to have to. Please stop this pattern.

cudgy 5y ago

Interesting is relative. In fact, many might find main stream media to be the opposite of interesting.

peter422 5y ago
MSM is by definition targeting the mainstream audience. Watch mainstream primetime television… It’s the same audience.

boomboomsubban 5y ago

>If Assange were actually standing trial, that’s interesting His extradition hearing to see if this charge can be tried is currently facing an appeal, and he is still in prison partially for this charge.

peter422 5y ago
Not in an American court, for a non-American citizen, for something that happened 10 years ago. It just isn’t as interesting as you think it is. And it is getting coverage! It just isn’t front page news.
- boomboomsubban 5y ago
  Yes in an American court, they are the ones charging him with these crimes. And it isn't getting any major oublisher coverage, searching "Julian Assange" on both DDG and Google news shows only Democracy Now covering the story.
  - dragonwriter 5y ago
    > Yes in an American court, they are the ones charging him with these crimes. Yes, the USA is charging him. It would be very odd for extradition hearings on US federal charges to be heard in a US court, and, in fact, these are not. Assange is not on trial, and the process he is currently undergoing in is not in an American court, though there are charges pending that he would face in a US court if that process completes as the US prefers. I can see you arguing that that's not important, but falsely denying the assertion that its not in a US court is...I mean, what's even the point?
    - boomboomsubban 5y ago
      Assange is set to face trial in a US court, and that is the only reason he is facing extradition. > I can see you arguing that that's not important, but falsely denying the assertion that its not in a US court is...I mean, what's even the point? I am arguing that it is important and view the extradition hearing as part of his larger US trial. His trial for skipping bail in the UK is long over, the only trial left is the US one.
      - dragonwriter 5y ago
        > I am arguing that it is important and view the extradition hearing as part of his larger US trial. The extradition hearing is factually not part of his US trial. > the only trial left is the US one. The US charges are the only ones that he is currently known to be facing a potential future trial for, sure. But “potential future” and “actual current” are not the same thing.
        boomboomsubban 5y ago
        The first step of the trial was for charges to be filed. The next part was using those charges to request his extradition. At this point you could say the extradition hearing is not a part of his trial, but it is only happening because of the trial and the US is the reason he is in prison currently. I'd write this off as weird pedantry but you're accusing me of lying for some reason.

mpfundstein 5y ago

man you are nuts. cant say it differently

dang 5y ago
Please don't break the site guidelines like this. It poisons the ecosystem here, and it discredits your view. The latter is especially pernicious if your view happens to be the right one, because then you're also discrediting the truth, which harms everybody (https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&sort=byDate&type=comment&query=truth%20discredit%20by:dang https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&sor...). If you wouldn't mind reviewing https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and taking the intended spirit of the site more to heart, we'd be grateful. Edit: yikes, you've been breaking the site guidelines a ton lately. When accounts are primarily using HN for ideological or political battle, we ban them; also when they're mostly posting unsubstantive and/or flamebait comments; and you've been doing both of these things. That's not cool. We've also had to warn you several times about this in the past. I don't want to ban you because you've posted good and relevant comments in the past, but if you don't stop this pattern, we're definitely going to have to. Please stop this pattern.